I just got to try out IWaMD last night. Good times were had, but there was some confusion about the rules and some awkwardness.

1) How do those check mark things work?Nicki the Astronaut has Needy 6, Stubborn 1, and Trust 2. She spends 2 trust to up her Stubborn to 3, and now has Trust 0.

When she gets check marks, do they go on her trust or her stubborn? Does it take two checks or four checks to turn her Stubborn into Cunning?

2) Help me wrap my brain around the during phase.

We found that for the most part, our characters wanted to give in to the temptations- but they were rolling to resist. As a result, we didn't take too many black dice, and we zoomed through the During Phase.

When Nicki had a chance to spend two years on the space station, and the guys were rolling to resist the career opportunity of a lifetime, or Reese the starving artist moved in with the sexy older art gallery lady and was rolling to resist succumbing to her temptations, there was a lot of confusion- we wanted to roll for our characters to get these things that they wanted. We played it as is, but I'm still trying to figure it out.

1) How do those check mark things work?Nicki the Astronaut has Needy 6, Stubborn 1, and Trust 2. She spends 2 trust to up her Stubborn to 3, and now has Trust 0.

When she gets check marks, do they go on her trust or her stubborn?

They go onto her Trust, because at present it is the lowest of her scores (6, 3, 0).

One important side point is that only one point of Trust may be burnt at any given time. A group cannot spend 2 Trust in one swoop.

But that doesn't alter the main point, because even with that rule in place, the group would have spent 1 Trust to result in Needy 6, Stubborn 2, and Trust 1. So Trust would still be the lowest and would still receive the tick mark(s).

Note that since it's 0, even just one tick-mark will turn it into a higher value (1), and it will instantly be transformed into Murderous.

Note also that it's possible to get tick-marks in more than one score in a single roll, because the scores' relative positions may change with a given single tick-mark. So the group needs to evaluate which is lowest for each tick-mark, sequentially, rather than just dumping all of them into the initially-lowest score.

Quote

Does it take two checks or four checks to turn her Stubborn into Cunning?

Well, we have to back up a little, given my answer above. Let's say that we are working with a Stubborn of 3, which I think is the value implied by the question. Let's also say that this score, Stubborn, is currently the lowest of them all.

For Stubborn to change to Cunning, it must receive its fourth tick-mark. That rule (change the name when tick-marks exceed value) do not apply to the original value, but to the current value, for all scores at all times.

Quote

2) Help me wrap my brain around the during phase.

Sure! This can be a bit of a stumper at first, but it makes a lot of sense once the whole group gets used to it.

The "challenger" group should be considered to represent the World, "trying" to get these two to break up. Or, in a way, they are even playing the other side's character just a little bit, because what they propose is by definition a genuine temptation to do something that threatens the relationship for that character.

The "challenged" group is playing that character's commitment to the relationship, even during the tough circumstances of the During phase.

As a side note, a short During phase is a fine thing, because it demonstrates that the entire group, playing both characters, has come to grips with the fact that the two characters must break up. So what happened with your group, and your two characters, is 100% legitimate - that's a dial that any group must spin in playing this gamet, by definition. You all just happened to spin it in a particular direction, that's all.

Given that, though, it's also fun when a group hits upon the perfect challenge-circumstances that leads the other group to say, "well, we know we're gonna have to break up, but damned if it's going to be over that," and strives to beat the other roll anyway. That's another way to spin the same dial. Maybe that will happen when and if you play the game again; it's neither better nor worse, but it does produce a very different sort of story.

So here's the way to look at it: if you, collectively as a team, really want your character to take the proffered opportunity, then consider yourselves to be seeking to roll low. If on the other hand, you all really want your character to resist that opportunity, then consider yourselves to be seeking to roll high. See? Either way, you're rolling for what you (the real people) want.